TECHNOLOGY AND MARKET TRIALS PROGRAM. Final Report Motorboss Motor Controller Field Test

Transcription

1 Las Vegas, Nevada TECHNOLOGY AND MARKET TRIALS PROGRAM Final Report Motorboss Motor Controller Field Test Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Test Sites Prepared By: Prepared For: Larry Holmes Program Manager, Energy Efficiency and Conservation Nevada Power Company March 2005

2 DISCLAIMER This document was prepared by, Inc., as an account of work sponsored by Nevada Power Company and is believed to contain correct information, but, Inc., makes no warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by Paragon Consulting Services, Inc. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 2 of 19

3 Table of Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary 4 Introduction Technology Description Test Objectives 5 Site Description and Test Methodology Site Facilities Test Procedures... 8 Test Instrumentation 9 Test Conditions.. 10 Discussion of Analysis and Results Impact on Demand Reduction (kw) Impact on Energy Consumption (kwh) Cost Effectiveness Overview.16 Tabulation of Results Conclusions Appendix A, Manufacturer Specifications for Field Test Motors Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 3 of 19

4 Executive Summary The Motorboss motor controller is a device designed to work with an electric motor to optimize the motor voltage at partial loads to reduce magnetic losses in the motor core. This reduces the electrical demand and energy consumption of the electric motor. The motor controller is most beneficial in reducing losses for motors running for long periods at low loads. The objective of the testing was to determine the level of motor efficiency improvement resulting from installation of Motorboss motor controllers on three conveyor motors at a Levi Strauss facility in Henderson and one escalator motor at McCarran Airport in Las Vegas. These installations are representative of a large number of motors used in conveyor and escalator applications. Testing consisted of measuring electrical demand and energy consumption of the motors with and without the Motorboss motor controller turned on, and comparing the results. The resulting data was analyzed and the results are documented in this report. Results showed that peak electrical demand reductions of kw ( %) were achieved on the three Levi Strauss conveyor motors due to Motorboss operation. A peak demand reduction of 0.79 kw (31.2%) was achieved on the McCarran Airport 15 HP escalator motor. Annual energy savings of kwh/year ( %) were projected for the three Levi Strauss conveyor motors. An annual energy saving of 6,515 kwh/year (34.2%) was projected for the McCarran Airport 15 HP escalator motor. Annual cost savings from utility billing reductions were projected to range from $43 for the 1.5 HP Levi Strauss conveyor motor to $64/year for the 5 HP motor, based on the current Nevada Power Company electric rate and 17 hour/day, five day/week use. Although energy savings on a percent basis were significant for these motors, actual cost savings were relatively small. For an installed cost of $400 for each of the Motorboss units, the payback periods ranged from 6.3 to 9.3 years. Cost savings from utility billing reductions were projected to be about $496/year for the McCarran Airport 15 HP escalator motor, based on the current Nevada Power Company electric rate and 24 hour/day, seven day/week use. Assuming an installed cost of $1500 for the Motorboss, the payback period would be 3.0 years. The results of installing a Motorboss motor controller on conveyor and escalator motors tended to confirm that lightly loaded motors in the 1.5 HP to 15 HP range are appropriate applications for motor controllers of this type. Motor loadings were less than 50% for the conveyor motors and less than 20% for the escalator motor. The payback period was shorter for the escalator motor, which was more lightly loaded and was operated a greater percentage of the time than the conveyor motors. A motor controller reduces the motor s operating electrical current and associated conductor losses. This in turn reduces motor operating temperatures which may extend motor life. A motor controller also provides a soft start capability which reduces mechanical stresses on the motor and associated machinery. These benefits may influence a user s decision to install a motor controller, but do not impact electric utility operations and were not addressed in this report. If included, these additional benefits would tend to reduce the payback period. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 4 of 19

5 1. Introduction Nevada Power Company (NPC) authorized field testing of Motorboss motor controllers as part of its Energy Efficiency and Conservation group s Technology and Market Trials Program. The tests were performed to measure and verify the manufacturer s motor controller performance claims and assess the energy savings and electrical demand reductions achievable in customer field-use situations at the Levi Strauss facility in Henderson, Nevada and at the McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas, Nevada. Technology Description While electrical impedance, mechanical, and magnetic losses are all present during the operation of an electric motor, it is the motor s core losses that are the focus of the Motorboss motor controller products. Core losses are the sum of energies expended to energize a motor s stator and rotor core. These losses can be grouped into two core-related loss categories: hysteresis and eddy current. Hysteresis losses result from energy expended in initially magnetizing the motor s core material; Eddy current losses result from energy expended in the form of heat when unavoidable currents flow within the conductive core material, motor housing, and any other conductive parts of the motor. Because the magnitude of the core losses is proportional the square of the source voltage applied to the motor stator, the Motorboss motor controller attempts to minimize the voltage applied to the motor when operation and load demands require less than full line voltage (i.e. partial motor loading). When the motor load is low, the motor voltage is reduced to reduce losses. As the load increases, the Motorboss continuously adjusts the motor voltage appropriately to meet the required load. The Motorboss controller utilizes an electronically controlled thyristor system to achieve this control. The Motorboss controller is most beneficial in reducing losses for motors running for long periods at low load. Test Objectives The tests were performed to measure and verify the manufacturer s motor controller performance claims and assess the energy savings and electrical demand reductions achievable in customer field-use situations at the Levi Strauss facility (three conveyors) in Henderson, Nevada and at the McCarran International Airport (one escalator) in Las Vegas, Nevada. Testing consisted of measuring electrical energy consumption of the motor with and without operating the Motorboss motor controller under similar operating conditions and comparing the results. The resulting data was analyzed and the results documented in this report. A benefit-cost calculation was made to assess the overall impact of utilizing the Motorboss motor controller as compared to operating the facilities motors alone. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 5 of 19

6 2. Site Description and Test Methodology Site Facilities The testing was conducted at two locations: The Levi Strauss facility at 501 Sky Harbor Blvd, Henderson, NV and at McCarran International Airport, Las Vegas, NV Business hours at the Levi Straus facility are typically Monday through Friday, 6:00 am to 11:00 pm. McCarran International Airport is open 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Figure 1. Map to Levi s Test Site Figure 2. Map to McCarran Test Site The level of motor electrical efficiency improvement resulting from installation of the Motorboss motor controller was tested on four separate electric motors, each a different size and having different functions and loading characteristics. a) Levi Strauss Facility HP Conveyor Motor - 3 HP Conveyor Motor - 5 HP Conveyor Motor b) McCarran International Airport - 15 HP Escalator Motor (This escalator transports passengers downward to the lower floor.) The three conveyor system motors at the Levi Strauss facility typically run continuously during plant operations. According to the plant technical supervisor, the 1.5 HP and 3 HP motors run on conveyor systems that transport empty product containers. The 5 HP motor runs on a conveyor system that transports fully/partially loaded product containers. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 6 of 19

7 The escalator motor at McCarran International Airport is typically run continuously 24 hours/day, seven days/week. The loading of this motor ranges from light to heavy and is intermittent and variable, depending on passenger density and travel inside the airport terminal. Figure 3. Levi Strauss 3 HP Conveyor Figure 4. McCarran Airport Escalator The motors specifications are given in the following table. Levi Strauss Facility Levi Strauss Facility Levi Strauss Facility McCarran Airport Motor Description Conveyor Conveyor Conveyor Escalator Manufacturer Baldor Baldor Baldor Imperial Model/Serial #'s VM3554T VM3611T VM3615T A03W206 35L114Y334 36A03W F695 F395 E Rating(HP) Rating(Volts) 208/230/ /230/ /230/ Rating(Amps) 5.3-5/ / / Phases RPM Power Factor Service Factor Continuous Duty Full Load Efficiency 78.5% 84.0% 85.5% 87.6% Motorboss Model # Integra MBI2.2 Integra MBI2.2 Integra MBI11 Integra MBI11 Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 7 of 19

8 Test Procedures In each test case, the Motorboss motor controller was installed on the branch circuit between the motor s existing controls/starter and the motor unit. As shown in Figure 5 below, the data logging instrumentation was installed between the distribution panel circuit breaker and the existing motor controls/starter. Installation of the data logging instrumentation at this location in the branch circuit provides the means to capture the electrical parameters associated with the combination of motor and motor controls/starter with/without the Motorboss controller. Electrical savings measured at this point represent the savings that would be recorded by the utility s electric meter. Nevada Power Company Measurement and Verification Metering Diagram (3 Watt-Element Power Measurement Method) Motorboss Field Test - EMF FROM THREE-PHASE SUPPLY C 480V A N 277V CT B CT CT Line Contactor L1 U Motorboss Integra L2 L3 V W Induction Motor CH1 CH2 CH3 CH4 L1 L2 L3 N ElitePro Meter/Logger Figure 5. Electrical Connection Location of the Motorboss Controller and Elite Pro Datalogger. The sequence and timelines for field tests and metering measurements were as follows: a) 1.5 HP, 3 HP, and 5 HP Electric Motors (Levi Strauss Facility) Baseline Testing Test Duration and Data Collection Rate: 24 hours at 2-minute intervals. Parameters Measured/Calculated: Voltage, current, demand power (kw), complex power (kva), and power factor. Conditions: Motor is operating. The Motorboss motor controller is disconnected and is not present in electrical system. Objective: Determine the baseline operating characteristics of the target motor. Performance Testing Test Duration and Data Collection Rate: Parameters Measured/Calculated: 24 hours at 2-minute intervals. Voltage, current, demand power (kw), complex power (kva), and power factor. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 8 of 19

9 Conditions: Objective: Motor is operating. The Motorboss motor controller is installed, enabled and operating in the motor branch circuit. Determine the operating characteristics of the motor circuit with the Motorboss motor controller installed, enabled, and operating in the circuit. b) 15 HP Electric Motor (McCarran Airport) Baseline Testing Test Duration and Data Collection Rate(1): 45 minutes at 3-second intervals. Test Duration and Data Collection Rate(2): 2 days at 2-minute intervals. Parameters Measured/Calculated: Voltage, current, demand power (kw), and power factor. Conditions: Motor is operating. The Motorboss motor controller is disconnected and is not present in electrical system. Objective: Additional: Determine the baseline operating characteristics of the target motor. In order to capture and identify repeatable loading conditions, time-stamped photographs were taken as needed throughout the testing period. Being able to isolate and identify repeated loading conditions enable a more detailed analysis of the collected data at specific load ranges. Performance Testing Test Duration and Data Collection Rate(1): 45 minutes at 3-second intervals. Test Duration and Data Collection Rate(2): 2 days at 2-minute intervals. Parameters Measured/Calculated: Voltage, current, demand power (kw), and power factor. Conditions: Motor is operating. The Motorboss motor controller is installed, enabled and operating in the motor branch circuit. Objective: Determine the operating characteristics of the motor circuit with the Motorboss motor controller installed, enabled, and operating in the circuit. Additional: In order to capture and identify repeatable loading conditions, time-stamped photographs were taken as needed throughout the testing period. Being able to isolate and identify repeated loading conditions enable a more detailed analysis of the collected data at specific load ranges. NOTE: Because the McCarran Airport escalator can experience varying loading and unloading, this application required addition of a high-resolution test to accurately determine electrical performance of the Motorboss under rapidly varying conditions. The Levi Strauss conveyors are operated such that loading changes are more gradual, and can be captured with the 2-minute interval data collection setting. Test Instrumentation Voltage, current, and power measurements were made using a Dent Instruments Elite PRO Recording Poly Phase Power Meter. This meter is a three-phase true-rms recording power meter, 12-bit A/D, with a sampling frequency of 7.68 khz. Clip-on voltage leads were used to monitor Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 9 of 19

10 voltage in each phase of the three phase circuit. The current was monitored in each phase using split core current transformers from Dent Instruments. Current transformers rated at 5 amps were used for the 1.5 HP and 3 HP conveyor motors at the Levi Strauss site. Current transformers rated at 50 amps were used for the 5 HP conveyor motor at the Levi Strauss site and the 15 HP escalator motor at the McCarran Airport site. The instrumentation installation configurations are shown for the Levi Strauss 3 HP conveyor motor and McCarran Airport escalator motor in Figures 6 and 7 respectively. Voltage Clips Voltage Clips Current Sensors Current Sensors Elite Pro Data Logger Elite Pro Data Logger Figure 6. Instrumentation at Levi Strauss Figure 7. Instrumentation at Airport Escalator 3 HP Conveyor Motor Electrical Panel Motor Electrical Panel. The installation of the instrumentation at the electrical panels was done by Paragon Consulting Services and site electricians. Test Conditions The tests of the three conveyer motors at the Levi Strauss facility were conducted on February 10-11, During the first day of testing the motors were monitored during normal operation, with the Motorboss connected, from around 10:00 am until 11:00 pm on February 10 when the plant closed for the night. When the facility opened at 6:00 am on February 11, the three conveyer motors were monitored with the Motorboss disconnected until the end of the February 11 shift at 11:00 pm. The test of the escalator motor at the airport was conducted in two phases. First the high resolution test data was done. This test consisted of monitoring the motor for a period of about 50 minutes with the Motorboss enabled, then disconnecting the Motorboss and monitoring for about 40 minutes. This test duration was limited to about 90 minutes total due to the memory capacity of the logger at the 3-second interval setting. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 10 of 19

11 Then a 46 hour test at the 2-minute resolution setting was conducted at the escalator from 2:00 pm on February 14 to noon February 16. The Motorboss was disconnected during the first part of the test, and enabled at about 1:45 pm on February 15 for the duration of the test. Mr. Ron Leighton, Regional Sales Manager for the Motorboss distributor, Electric Magnetic Force, was present at the tests and reviewed all Paragon data collection activities. 3. Discussion of Analysis and Results The data collected from the field test was summarized and analyzed to determine the level of benefits obtained from the operation of the Motorboss motor controller with three conveyor motors and one escalator test motor. The primary benefits of interest to Nevada Power Company were the impacts on electrical demand, kw, and electrical energy savings, kwh. Other potential benefits to a user of the Motorboss, such as reduced motor operating temperature/increased motor life and soft start capability, were not analyzed in this analysis. These potential benefits may influence a user s decision to install a motor controller, but do not impact electric utility operations. Impact on Demand Reduction, kw The reduction of motor losses and corresponding improvement efficiency should result in reduced electrical demand for the same level of motor output. Figure 8 shows the electrical demand of the 1.5 HP conveyer motor at the Levi Strauss site with the Motorboss operating, On, and not operating, Off. MotorBoss Motor Controller Test Levi Strauss 1.5 HP Conveyer Motor Motor Power Demand vs Time of Day 1.5 MotorBoss On MotorBoss Off Motor Power Demand in KW :00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 12:00 AM 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 12:00 AM 2/10/05 2/11/05 Date and Time of Day Figure 8. Motor Power vs. Time, 1.5 HP Conveyor: Motorboss On and Motorboss Off Periods. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 11 of 19

12 In Figure 8, it can be seen that there were several periods in which the conveyor was briefly shut down as part of normal operational activity. These shut downs were ignored for the purposes of this analysis, and the comparison of the electrical demand included only the times the motor was operating. It was further assumed that the motor loading was similar from one day to the other during the time periods when the power was at a uniform level. Overall loading of the conveyer motor was around 50%. The average kw demand over the five hour period 2:00-7:00 pm, February 10 was compared to the average kw over the two hour period 7:00-9:00 am and the three hour period 1:00-4:00 pm on February 11. These were periods of uniform loading and were assumed to represent similar operating conditions for the Motorboss On and Motorboss Off periods. The average demand for the Motorboss On period was kw and for the Motorboss Off period was kw, a reduction of kw or 14.3% when the Motorboss was operating. Figure 9 shows the electrical demand of the 3 HP conveyer motor at the Levi Strauss site with the Motorboss operating, On, and not operating, Off. MotorBoss Motor Controller Test Levi Strauss 3 HP Conveyer Motor Motor Power Demand vs Time of Day 2.5 MotorBoss On MotorBoss Off 2.0 Motor Power Demand in KW :00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 12:00 AM 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 12:00 AM 2/10/05 2/11/05 Date and Time of Day Figure 9. Motor Power vs. Time, 3 HP Conveyor: Motorboss On and Motorboss Off Periods. Following the methodology used in analyzing the 1.5 HP conveyor results, the average kw demand over the four hour period 2:00-6:00 pm, February 10 was compared to the average kw over the three and one-half hour period 12:06-3:36 pm on February 11. These were periods of reasonably uniform loading and were assumed to represent similar operating conditions for the Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 12 of 19

13 Motorboss On and Motorboss Off periods. In this test there were several periods of increased power demand by the motors. However, it was not possible to determine whether the loads were equivalent or not, so these periods were not compared. Overall loading of the conveyer motor was around 40-45%. The average demand for the Motorboss On period was kw and for the Motorboss Off period was kw, a reduction of kw or 14.6% when the Motorboss was operating. Figure 10 shows the electrical demand of the 5 HP conveyer motor at the Levi Strauss site with the Motorboss operating, On, and not operating, Off. MotorBoss Motor Controller Test Levi Strauss 5 HP Conveyer Motor Motor Power Demand vs Time of Day MotorBoss On MotorBoss Off :00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM Motor Power Demand in KW 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 12:00 AM 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 12:00 AM 2/10/05 2/11/05 Date and Time of Day Figure 10. Motor Power vs. Time, 5 HP Conveyor: Motorboss On and Motorboss Off Periods. Following the methodology used in analyzing the 1.5 HP and 3 HP conveyor results, the average kw demand over the five hour period 12:00-5:00 pm, February 10 was compared to the average kw over the eight hour period 7:00 am -3:00 pm on February 11. These were periods of reasonably uniform loading and were assumed to represent similar operating conditions for the Motorboss On and Motorboss Off periods. Overall loading of the conveyer motor was around 40%. The average demand for the Motorboss On period was kw and for the Motorboss Off period was kw, a reduction of kw or 11.5% when the Motorboss was operating. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 13 of 19

14 Figure 11 shows the electrical demand of the 15 HP escalator motor at the McCarran Airport site with the Motorboss not operating, Off, and operating, On. MotorBoss Motor Controller Test McCarran Airport 15 HP Escalator Motor Motor Power Demand vs Time of Day MotorBoss Off MotorBoss On :00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM Motor Power Demand in KW 12:00 AM 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 12:00 AM 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2/14/05 2/15/05 2/16/05 Date and Time of Day Figure 11. Motor Power vs. Time, 15 HP Escalator: Motorboss Off and Motorboss On Periods. For an up escalator, an increase in traffic on the escalator would increase the load on the motor. This escalator is a down escalator and an increase of people using the escalator would tend to reduce the load on the motor. This is evident in Figure 11 which shows that there are various reductions in load during the day when the escalator is used. The peak demand occurs during the 1:00 am to 5:00 am period when there is little use of the escalator. It was assumed that the motor loading was similar from one day to the other during the 1:00 am to 5:00 am time periods when the power was at a uniform level. The averaged kw demand over the peak four hour period 1:00-5:00 am, February 15 was compared to the averaged kw over the peak four hour period 1:00 am -5:00 pm on February 16. These were periods of reasonably uniform loading and were assumed to represent similar operating conditions for the Motorboss Off and Motorboss On periods. The peak demand for the Motorboss Off period was 2.54 kw, and for the Motorboss On period was 1.75 kw, a reduction of 0.79 kw or 31.2% when the Motorboss was operating during times of its peak electrical demand. The average electrical kw demand over the full operating period is used to determine the electrical energy, kwh, use over the period. For this case the average demand for the Motorboss Off Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 14 of 19

15 period (2:00 pm, February 14 12:00 pm, February 15) was 2.17 kw and for the Motorboss On period (2:00 pm, February 15-12:00 pm, February 16) was 1.43 kw, a reduction of 0.74 kw or 34.2%. The motor was lightly loaded, about 20%, when there was little use of the escalator, and even more lightly loaded when being used. A lightly loaded motor is generally considered to be a preferred application for a motor controller of this type. A test was also conducted in which high resolution, 3-second interval, data was taken for a 110 minute period, 60 minutes with the Motorboss On and 50 minutes with the Motorboss Off. During this period the traffic on the escalator has highly variable, producing a very non-uniform loading. Even with time stamped photos it was not possible to make a meaningful comparison of the equivalent-load kw demand between the periods when the Motorboss is off and on. As a result, no conclusions were drawn from this data. Impact on Energy Consumption, kwh The kw demand reduction resulting from the operation of the Motorboss was used to determine the energy consumption reduction of the motor. The average kw demand reduction multiplied by the number of hours in a period determines the energy consumption in kwh for that period. For the Levi Strauss conveyor motors, the reduction in peak kw determined from the test period was assumed to be representative of average kw reduction for the entire test period. This provides energy use reductions of 0.117, 0.140, and kwh per hour for the 1.5 HP, 3 HP, and 5 HP motors respectively. In the case of 17 hour/day, five day/week operation (as was the case for the Levi Strauss motors), the annual energy savings would be 521 kwh, 621 kwh, and 769 kwh for the three motors. This assumes that the demand reduction determined from the tests is representative of all other periods of operation. This also assumes that the number of hours of operation per week (17 hours/day and five days/week is representative of the entire year. Data taken by the Motorboss manufacturer representatives in July 2004 at the Levi Strauss facility indicated higher conveyer motor loads and somewhat higher demand reduction benefits. Levi Strauss reportedly operates its facility additional hours at times during the year on an as needed basis. Taking these factors into account would tend to increase the annual projected benefits by a corresponding amount. However, these factors could not be accurately quantified or independently verified, and only the February 2005 data collected by was used in this report. For the McCarran Airport escalator motor, the reduction in peak kw determined from the test period (0.79 kw) was found to be slightly different from average kw reduction for the test period (0.74 kw). The average kw reduction (0.74 kw) was used to calculate the average kwh energy use reduction for the test period. This provides an average energy use reduction value of 0.74 kwh per hour for the escalator motor. In the case of 24 hour/day, seven day/week operation, the projected annual energy savings would be 6,515 kwh for the motor. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 15 of 19

16 Cost Effectiveness Overview An analysis was conducted to determine the cost savings resulting from installation of the Motorboss on the motors tested. For the Levi Strauss motors, reductions in kwh and demand were valued based on its current Nevada Power Company Rate: LGS-3, primary distribution service. This rate is presented in the table below. Results show that the total savings would be $43/year, $52/year, and $64/year for the 1.5 HP, 3 HP, and 5 HP motors respectively. Discussions with Electric Magnetic Force, the Motorboss distributor involved in these installations, indicated that the installed cost of the Motorboss controllers is $400 each, which would indicate a payback of 9.3, 7.7, and 6.3 years respectively for the three motors. To the extent that Levi Strauss schedules overtime or weekend operations, these increased operating hours would increase savings and also reduce the payback period below the presented values. For the McCarran Airport escalator motor, reductions in kwh and demand were valued based on its current Nevada Power Company Rate: LGS-3, secondary distribution service. This is presented in the table below. Results show that the total savings would be $496/year for the 15 HP escalator motor. Based on information from Electric Magnetic Force, the installed cost of the Motorboss for the escalator motor is $1500, which results in a payback of 3.0 years with the $496/ year benefit. ENERGY CHARGES Applicable Nevada Power Company Electric Rates, Effective 06/01/04 LGS-3, Primary Distr. Voltage LGS-3, Secondary Distr. Voltage Per kwh Summer June 1-September 30 Peak $ $ :00 pm-7:00 pm Mid-Peak $ $ :00 am-1:00 pm & 7:00 pm-10:00 pm Off-Peak $ $ :00 pm-10:00 am Winter October 1-May 31 All Periods $ $ All Periods DEMAND CHARGES Per kw, based on maximum monthly 15- minute average kw reading Summer June 1-September 30 Peak $9.05 $8.36 1:00 pm-7:00 pm Mid-Peak $0.41 $ :00 am-1:00 pm & 7:00 pm-10:00 pm Off-Peak $0.00 $ :00 pm-10:00 am Winter October 1-May 31 All Periods $0.50 $0.50 All Periods FACILITIES CHARGE Per kw, based on maximum demand for billing period and previous 12 months All Periods $2.50 $2.94 All Periods Throughout Year CUSTOMER Per meter, fixed monthly fee. CHARGE Per Meter $268 $184 All Periods Throughout Year Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 16 of 19

17 If other potential Motorboss benefits, such as reduced motor temperature/increased motor life and the value of soft start capability were taken into account it would tend to reduce the payback periods for these Motorboss applications. These potential benefits may influence a user s decision to install a motor controller, but do not impact electric utility operations. Evaluation of these potential benefits was not within the scope of this analysis. Tabulation of Results The test results discussed in the previous section are summarized in the following table. Levi Strauss Levi Strauss Levi Strauss McCarran Airport Facility Facility Facility Motor Description Conveyor Conveyor Conveyor Escalator, Down Rating(HP) Motorboss Model # Integra MBI2.2 Integra MBI2.2 Integra MBI11 Integra MBI11 Operating Schedule 17 hr/d, 5 d/wk 17 hr/d, 5 d/wk 17 hr/d, 5 d/wk 24 hr/d, 7 d/wk Demand Reduction Peak Demand Reduction in kw kw kw kw 0.79 kw Peak Demand Reduction in % 14.3% 14.6% 11.5% 31.2% Energy Use Reduction Annual Energy Use Reduction in kwh 521 kwh 621 kwh 769 kwh 6,515 kwh Annual Energy Use Reduction in % 14.3% 14.6% 11.5% 34.2% Cost Savings Utility Electric Rate LGS-3, Primary LGS-3, Primary LGS-3, Primary LGS-3, Secondary Annual Peak Demand Charge Savings $ 8 $10 $12 $ 58 Annual Energy Savings $35 $42 $52 $438 Total Annual Cost Savings $43 $52 $64 $496 Payback Period 9.3 years 7.7 years 6.3 years 3.0 years Motorboss manufacturer data taken in July 2004 for the McCarran Airport escalator was generally similar to the results presented in this report. Manufacturer data recorded in July 2004 for the Levi Strauss 1.5 HP and 3 HP motors indicated somewhat higher conveyer motor loads and higher benefits (by approximately 5-10 percentage points). The Motorboss manufacturer s representative indicated that the Levi Strauss conveyor loading is typically higher in July than in February and could account for the difference. This could not be independently verified and only the February 2005 data collected by Paragon was used in this report. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 17 of 19

18 6. Conclusions Peak kw demand reductions of kw ( %) were achieved at the three Levi Strauss conveyor motors due to Motorboss operation. A peak demand reduction of 0.79 kw (31.2%) was achieved at the McCarran Airport 15 HP escalator motor due to Motorboss operation. Annual energy savings of kwh/year ( %) were projected for the three Levi Strauss conveyor motors due to Motorboss operation. An annual energy saving of 6,515 kwh/year (34.2%) was projected for the McCarran Airport 15 HP escalator motor due to Motorboss operation. Cost savings from utility billing reductions were projected to range from $43 for the 1.5 HP Levi Strauss conveyor motor to $64/year for the 5 HP motor, based on the current Nevada Power Company electric rate. Assuming an installed cost of $400 for each of the Motorboss units, the payback periods would range from 6.3 to 9.3 years. If Levi Strauss increases facility operation beyond 17 hours/day, five days/week, the payback periods may be reduced. Even though energy savings on a percentage basis may be significant for smaller motors, the energy cost saving is relatively small. Cost savings from utility billing reductions were projected to be about $496/year for the McCarran Airport 15 HP escalator motor, based on the current Nevada Power Company electric rate and continued 24 hour/day, seven day/week operation. Assuming an installed cost of $1500 for the Motorboss, the payback period would be 3.0 years. A lightly loaded motor is generally considered to be a preferred application for a motor controller of this type. Typical motor loadings were less than 50% for the conveyor motors and less than 20% for the escalator motor. The payback period was shorter for the escalator motor, which was more lightly loaded and was operated a greater percentage of the time than the conveyor motors. A motor controller reduces the motor s operating electrical current and associated conductor losses. This in turn reduces motor operating temperatures which may extend motor life. A motor controller also provides a soft start capability which reduces mechanical stresses on the motor and associated machinery. These benefits may influence a user s decision to install a motor controller, but do not impact electric utility operations and were not addressed in this report. If included, these additional benefits would tend to reduce the payback period. Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 18 of 19

19 Appendix A Manufacturer Specifications For Field Test Motors Equipped with Motorboss Controllers 1. Baldor Motor, 1.5 HP, Conveyor, Attached 2. Baldor Motor, 3 HP, Conveyor, Attached 3. Baldor Motor, 5 HP, Conveyor, Attached 4. Imperial Motor, 15 HP, Escalator, Tabulation Not Available Final Report, Motorboss Field Test, Levi Strauss and McCarran Airport Sites Page 19 of 19

20 Products: AC Motors: VM3554T: Baldor Electric Company, a leader in energy efficient electric mot... Page 1 of 1 3/15/2005 Product Quick Search VM3554T General Information Overview Specifications Performance Data Parts List CAD Drawings Product Brochure More Information Locate Distributor Baldor Sales Offices Return to List AC Motors General Purpose Specifications: VM3554T Catalog Number: VM3554T Specification Number: 35A03W206 Horsepower: 1 1/2 Voltage: /460 Hertz: 60 Phase: 3 Full Load Amps: 5.3-5/2.5 Usable at 208 Volts: 5.3 RPM: 1725 Frame Size: 145TC Service Factor: 1.15 Rating: 40C AMB-CONT Locked Rotor Code: K NEMA Design Code: B Insulation Class: B Full Load Efficiency: 78.5 Power Factor: 72 Enclosure: TEFC Baldor Type: 3520M DE Bearing: 6205 ODE Bearing: 6203 Electrical Specification Number: 35WGW206 Mechanical Specification Number: 35A003 Base: N Mounting: F1 * For certified information, contact your local Baldor office. Products Support News/Events About Baldor Investor Relations Home Copyright Baldor Electric Company. All rights reserved. This site works best with Internet Explorer and Netscape 4.x and above.

21 Products: AC Motors: VM3611T: Baldor Electric Company, a leader in energy efficient electric mot... Page 1 of 1 3/15/2005 Product Quick Search VM3611T General Information Overview Specifications Performance Data Parts List CAD Drawings Product Brochure More Information Locate Distributor Baldor Sales Offices Return to List AC Motors General Purpose Specifications: VM3611T Catalog Number: VM3611T Specification Number: 35L114Y334 Horsepower: 3 Voltage: /460 Hertz: 60 Phase: 3 Full Load Amps: /4.1 Usable at 208 Volts: 8.5 RPM: 1725 Frame Size: 182TC Service Factor: 1.15 Rating: 40C AMB-CONT Locked Rotor Code: K NEMA Design Code: B Insulation Class: F Full Load Efficiency: 84 Power Factor: 82 Enclosure: TEFC Baldor Type: 3535M DE Bearing: 6206 ODE Bearing: 6203 Electrical Specification Number: 35WGY334 Mechanical Specification Number: 35L114 Base: N Mounting: F1 * For certified information, contact your local Baldor office. Products Support News/Events About Baldor Investor Relations Home Copyright Baldor Electric Company. All rights reserved. This site works best with Internet Explorer and Netscape 4.x and above.

22 Products: AC Motors: VM3615T: Baldor Electric Company, a leader in energy efficient electric mot... Page 1 of 1 3/15/2005 Product Quick Search VM3615T General Information Overview Specifications Performance Data Parts List CAD Drawings Product Brochure More Information Locate Distributor Baldor Sales Offices Return to List AC Motors General Purpose Specifications: VM3615T Catalog Number: VM3615T Specification Number: 36A03W415 Horsepower: 5 Voltage: /460 Hertz: 60 Phase: 3 Full Load Amps: /6.6 Usable at 208 Volts: 15 RPM: 1725 Frame Size: 184TC Service Factor: 1.15 Rating: 40C AMB-CONT Locked Rotor Code: J NEMA Design Code: B Insulation Class: F Full Load Efficiency: 85.5 Power Factor: 80 Enclosure: TEFC Baldor Type: 3634M DE Bearing: 6206 ODE Bearing: 6205 Electrical Specification Number: 36WGW415 Mechanical Specification Number: 36A003 Base: N Mounting: F1 * For certified information, contact your local Baldor office. Products Support News/Events About Baldor Investor Relations Home Copyright Baldor Electric Company. All rights reserved. This site works best with Internet Explorer and Netscape 4.x and above.